Michelle Rempel

[The Environment, May 17th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I am really glad to be able to address my colleague opposite tonight. Since she has moved portfolios, and I congratulate her on her new appointment, we have missed her at the environment committee greatly.

At one of the most recent environment committees, we had the Commissioner of the Environment come and talk about his most recent report. In April of this year, the most recent report on greenhouse gas emissions in Canada was released. That data showed that while the economy grew by 3.2%—meaning we saw a growth in the economy and an expansion of industry—our greenhouse gas emissions virtually stabilized. There was only a 0.25% increase in greenhouse gas emissions.

For the first time in this country, we are seeing the economy grow while greenhouse gas emissions growth stabilizes. This is a very good thing.

I will bring the member up to speed on what was said in that meeting. One of my colleagues asked,

Did I hear correctly that the inventory data that was not reflected in your report dealt with 2010 emissions?

The evironment commissioner repled,

That's correct. There's a lag between the year and when Environment Canada compiles all the data and releases it.

Those data were not reflected in the most recent report, and in fact the regulations that we are putting in place on certain sectors of the economy were not included in the forecast as well.

What we are trying to do is, again, balance environmental stewardship. We understand the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in this country, but we also need to do that while encouraging economic growth.

The original question my colleague put on the order paper, and I am not sure if she remembers, dealt with the $35 million for climate change research that was announced through the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

In the member's new portfolio, I would like to talk about an institution, a granting council that I worked with quite extensively in my previous career and this great program, because I would like to encourage my colleague to vote for our budget. We are investing heavily in science and technology, specifically in an institution she should be quite familiar with at McGill University.

In fact, a search of McGill University's NSERC grants since fiscal year 2006 shows an investment of over $250 million in McGill University. There are actually at least two Canada Research Chairs in climate change; I think there are more than that. I would encourage the member to go and talk to her colleagues who received NSERC funding since our government has been in power. I encourage her to talk to them about the impact of NSERC funding on their careers.

What we are doing in this budget is actually increasing funding to the granting councils. For example, we are providing $500 million to the Canada Foundation for Innovation over five years. This is a great program that provides research infrastructure to researchers across the country.

I certainly hope that she would support important investments into research and development across the country, and specifically I would like to remind the member about the investments that our government has made in climate change research. In fact, since 2006 we have invested over $252 million to support regulatory activities to address climate change and air quality.

Another institution that the member should familiarize herself with in her role is Sustainable Development Technology Canada. This is a great organization that works on commercializing technology that is related to clean energy.

All of these institutions work to address problems related to industry use and to resource development and climate change here in our country. We are actually best practice leaders in a lot of this research.

I hope she will go and talk to her leader, who is pitting workers and regions against one another. I hope she will support cross-Canada research that we are investing in that addresses these problems.

[Points of Order, May 17th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I firmly share my colleague's belief that we should have decorum in the House of Commons, given that we all have responsibilities as parliamentarians to take debate seriously. I also hope that my colleague opposite would encourage some of his members who use demeaning comments like “Muskoka minister”, et cetera, in their comments, and share that with caucus. We will do the same.

[Points of Order, May 17th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am just responding to previous comments made in the House. As a female member of Parliament, I think it is important for all of us to respect appropriate language when it comes to gender in the House. I think that all parliamentarians in the House share that view, and I hope that we all work together, both sides of the House, in doing that in the future.

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, this week the environment committee is travelling across the country to develop recommendations for a national conservation plan. We have heard a lot in committee about the concept of a working landscape, that is, land being used for productive purposes while ensuring a positive ecosystem balance through sustainable development plans.

Recently, I met with some municipal leaders in British Columbia. They talked about how they have to put more resources into getting permits for ditch cleanup than they actually have available to do the work to protect the environment in that area.

I would ask my colleague opposite how he would address the concerns of farmers who cannot drain their ditches and who are losing productive land under current rules.

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, I want to thank all my colleagues here on the government side for being with us tonight and doing such a great job. We have a great team here. It is 1:20 Wednesday morning, and it gives me great pride to work with my colleagues.

I want to speak about our plan for oil sands monitoring.

Over the last year, Canada has weathered economic storms, and few other countries in the world have succeeded in the same way we have. Oil sands and oil sands development have had an important part to play in this. They are an extremely important resource for Canada and a key driver of our economic development.

Our country's oil reserves, 97% of which are found in the oil sands, are third only to major producing nations such as Saudi Arabia and Venezuela in proven national oil supplies. The oil sands sector accounts for 2% of our GDP and accounted for more than $17 billion in capital investment in 2010.

Equally important to this government is that the oil sands are developed in an environmentally responsible way. While the leader of the opposition will travel across this country and try to tell Canadians it is okay to slander people in one region, who work in one sector, against people in another, Canadians know different. They know we are united under one banner.

We are united under an economy that provides jobs and opportunity for Canadians in an equal way. This equality, this unity, is something our government stands for, and as a government member, I am certainly proud to stand here tonight and talk about responsible resource development that will ensure jobs and economic growth for years to come for this country.

The sustainable development of Canada's oil sands will require discipline, focus and co-operation to protect the environment while realizing the full positive potential for all Canadians. That is exactly what our government is committed to doing.

Last July, we released our integrated environment monitoring plan for the oil sands, a plan that was developed in partnership with leading environmental scientists from across Canada. It outlined the elements needed for a world-class monitoring program with a comprehensive approach that covers water, air and biodiversity. Then in February, we released a joint implementation plan describing how we would work with the Government of Alberta and industry, in consultation with other key stakeholders, to put a world-class monitoring program in place.

Rather than slander the sector, we worked with the stakeholders, we worked with industry and we worked with the communities to put together a plan that would ensure this monitoring system was put in place in a sustainable way.

This plan will make Canada's oil sands monitoring among the best in the world. It optimizes existing provincial and federal environmental monitoring for water, air and biodiversity and is being carried out in an efficient manner as we utilize infrastructure that is in currently place. Monitoring will be comprehensive and integrated. We will seek advice from all stakeholders as we deliver on this plan. Implementation will be tracked through annual progress reports.

This new program will be subject to external scientific peer review at the end of the three-year implementation, and periodically thereafter. Therefore, in spite of what the opposition will say, there will be external peer review as part of this process.

This will ensure that we build and maintain one of the best environmental monitoring systems anywhere in the world. This is a democratic free country where we have oil reserves that are under a democratic government with a world-class oil sands monitoring program.

This collaboration and informed discussion are the cornerstones to success for an undertaking as complex and as important as the oil sands monitoring development project. We will make the system highly transparent. We will ensure that scientific data that is collected from our monitoring and analysis is publicly available with common quality assurance practices in place. As we move forward with the implementation of this program, we will continue to engage stakeholders, so they are informed each step of the way.

The governments of both Canada and Alberta have already committed significant resources to environmental monitoring. Industry has indicated it is willing to provide the additional funding required to implement the new monitoring activities and is working with the two governments to establish sustainable funding arrangements for the program.

Our plan for the oil sands monitoring is a direct result of the fact that this government listened and acted. We listened to environmental monitoring experts when they raised concerns about possible environmental impacts of the oil sands. We acted. We listened to an environmental advisory panel that recommended we develop a world-class, scientifically credible and trusted monitoring reporting system, which the Environment Commissioner noted as such in committee testimony.

We listened to Canadians who support the environmentally responsible development of this economic resource. We look forward to the next 12 months as our government is keenly interested in striking the right balance between economic renewal and environmental protection.

As we close off this hearing tonight, I think it is really important to note that our government is not interested in rhetoric or inflaming different regions against each other.

We want to ensure that our country is prosperous. We have seen the creation of hundreds of thousands of jobs since 2009. We have a plan to ensure that economic growth is created, and the energy sector is part of that. We are balancing that with a firm environmental stewardship plan that is funded in this budget. We have all sorts of excellent metrics in place through the oil sands monitoring program. We need to ensure that the rhetoric that is put in place by the NDP is not something that Canadians take to heart. This is about the sustainable development of our energy sector.

As an Albertan and as a Canadian, I certainly hope that my constituents' voices and the voices of all Canadians who are impacted by this important sector are listened to by the NDP and that the NDP will not continue this harmful, disuniting practice of pitting workers in one region against the other.

When we look at the government's track record, millions of dollars have been invested into programs that have created positive environmental impacts. My colleagues tonight have talked about the Lake Winnipeg Basin and the local conservation groups that we are supporting. Right now we are travelling across the country in the environment committee, but the NDP is not talking about that, listening to Canadians and talking about how we can engage local conservation groups in creating a national conservation plan framework, something that we committed to in our throne speech.

Instead of the Liberal Party that puts forward plans, grand international accords and sees greenhouse gas emissions rising, we are actually taking action. The most recent greenhouse gas emission trend report came forward. It showed that for the first time we are seeing economic growth in this country, and the stabilization of our greenhouse gas emissions.

Listening to Canadians and industry and coming up with a plan that balances economic growth with environmental stewardship is something that is prudent, it is something that Canadians want and it is something that I am certainly proud to support.

I am proud of our environment minister and proud of our team here.

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, with regard to the driver policy, I am certainly glad our Minister of the Environment is working hard. Anything to do with the policy is also subject to confidentiality terms, privacy terms as per Parliament.

With regard to the charitable status of political activities in this country, Canadians want to see charities work within the tax code. Surveys have been done that show that more than 80% of Canadians agree with what we put in budget 2010, which is ensuring compliance with the tax code. Charities do great work in our communities. We just want to make sure that, when people are giving their hard-earned dollars to charities, they are complying with the tax rules. That is all.

This is something the opposition should support. We want to make sure that scope is respected.

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for this very important question, because to put these comments into perspective, we have been talking tonight a lot about funding programs that support the environment.

The oil sands make a very important contribution to the Canadian economy. If developed sustainably, the oil sands are projected to contribute over $2.1 trillion over the next 25 years to our economy. To have the Leader of the Opposition engaging in tactics that would see workers in one region pitted against workers in another is not really productive. It is not productive to help grow the economy; furthermore, it is not productive towards ensuring that we continue to have industrial growth so that these important programs we are talking about tonight—programs we need to fund, such as the Great Lakes Basin protection programs—will continue to have sustainable funding available.

I certainly hope that my colleagues opposite, over the coming weeks, will repudiate their leader's comments and support workers across this country in a unified way.

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, my colleague's question is well-informed. He is quite correct. I have a great fondness in my heart for Lake Winnipeg, having grown up spending countless summer nights on that lake. It is dear to many people in the prairie provinces. However, it is important to note as well that the Lake Winnipeg basin's watershed exceeds over one million square kilometres. As my colleague mentioned, it also incorporates part of the northern U.S. states.

Therefore, it is particularly important that we continue the work we do as a government to monitor water quality in the major rivers that contribute nutrients to Lake Winnipeg, including the Red, Pembina and Saskatchewan Rivers. As has been mentioned already tonight, we are also monitoring for biological effects and changes along the southern shoreline of the lake and following nutrient transport from distributed sources.

The one thing I want to highlight in my colleague's comments is the ongoing partnership that our government has with local conservation groups, local research teams and industry groups to get to a point where we have policy in place that balances that need to use the landscape to produce agriculture with that environmental protection component. Our investments into this area are so important and vital. As a former Manitoban, this is really important to the people of that province and the watershed basin. We hope we will continue with those measures well into the future.

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, I want to personally thank the member for Selkirk—Interlake for his hard work on the Lake Winnipeg file. He has been a tireless advocate for the health of that lake. I know he supports our government's continued funding for the important environmental protection work that we are doing in that area.

With regard to his question, Canada's chemical management plan is leading the world on many fronts. We are the first country in the world to conduct a systematic assessment of all chemicals in commerce. This has put us in a position where we are pioneering the management of certain chemicals. For example, Canada was the first country in the world to take action to prohibit the importation, sale and advertising of baby bottles that contain BPA.

The CMP will continue to protect the health of Canadians and the environment. We will continue to work with industry to support stewardship and innovation, to partner and engage with all stakeholders for effectiveness and efficiency, to invest in research and monitoring, to work with our international partners and to make information on chemicals publicly available so that Canadians can participate in consultations with us and make informed decisions.

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, again, our government wants to make sure that charities operate within the tax parameters that are set out in the tax code. Canadians support this.

I should remind my colleague opposite that her government proposed the carbon tax, a tax on everything that would hurt jobs in this country, and our government will not do that.